Louis Vuitton S/S 10 Paris

I actually think that the collection is quite commercial if you ignore the shoes and hair......
 
of course it is. I think it's funny how girls at McQueen are sea snakes and at Marc people are like WTF. If you want to put a stupid hairdo on your models, do it, no need for an artsy-fartsy excuse.
The jackets will fly off the racks! There's nothing like a MJ jacket.
 
I just don't feel it... specially the anti it-shoes with their doggy ears! what's that!?!?!?!

all the pieces are easy sells. They adjust very well to market demands and LV maniacs would purchase these items... however if you want to buy a luxury item, you need some reasons to spend over 3000-4000$ in a dress, like creativity, uniqueness and quality and from what I'm seeing some pieces lack of the first two things.

what i like about LV is how different collections look from each others... but I guess that's the Marc Jacobs effect.
 
I'm not at all outraged by this - in fact, I think there's a certain grace in MJ openly admitting that he's no fashion genius. In the past, the pain comes from his desire to be taken seriously as one of the gods in the pantheon of fashion design. There is also a frank admission of his "stylist" approach - yes, these are blogger looks that any boy/girl can DIY from vintage shops, H&M, eBay, but who cares as long as they all save $$$ up to buy one of these covetable $$$$ bags?

He's a smart guy, and he puts his money where his talents are.
 
I like the afros, the shoes are whatev; I just don't like the clothes.
 
this show again (after the marc jacobs collection in new york) has some of the best jackets i have seen in all season!!

EDIT: i mean in terms of cut/structure/proportion (as i've said before, the orange denim monogram is just not my thing)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
i'm not impressed by the collection but the whole package gave me a happy feeling...
can't wait for the HQs :smile:
 
As usual

Tacky, vile and overexaggerated. I literally sit in awe at how people flock to this hacks work. To think that a luxury brand like Vuitton has sunk to this level of fashion is unfathomable. Case point, Margiela at Hermes then Gaultier, both managed to retain their style while still creating some stunning variations on a luxury brands label. Its just bad.
 
however if you want to buy a luxury item, you need some reasons to spend over 3000-4000$ in a dress, like creativity, uniqueness and quality and from what I'm seeing some pieces lack of the first two things....

that's not true. people buy louis vuitton not because of creativity, uniqueness, and quality, but BECAUSE it costs three to four thousand. it's conspicuous consumption at its height. it's always been a status brand in that way.
 
Jacobs made a mockery of the Vuitton house IMHO. Each brand has a image, style, feel and experience behind it. THis collection is not LV this is Marc Jacbos part duex.

I understand bringing the house to modern world but the brand image should be seen in each piece as it modernizes and conforms to new. This is an insult. and frankly Im turned off by Jacobs because of this- something very selfish was done in this collection.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
^selfish? did you also think john galliano selfish when he turned out his exotic fantasies at the house of dior? seriously, when done correctly, spectacle sells in fashion.
 
Sorry but Dior is quite the bore - every season is the same thought recycled into a new color. I dont look forward to Dior anymore.

I meant selfish in that Jacobs didnt have the LV house and image/history in mind. He had Jacobs in mind.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

New Posts

Forum Statistics

Threads
212,571
Messages
15,189,507
Members
86,466
Latest member
neverendingstudent
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "058526dd2635cb6818386bfd373b82a4"
<-- Admiral -->